The self proclaimed ‘Doglistener’ Stan Rawlinson is an established liar who deceives people as to his actual identity it has been revealed.

Stan Rawlinson is a dog trainer who has spent years building up a self styled image under the unoriginal monicker of ‘The DogListener’. He is not to be confused in any way with ‘The Dog Listener’ which is a brand known to many by the established and well respected dog trainer Jan Fennel.

Stan Rawlinson is not connected with the Dog Listener organisation but has instead coined the name DogListener. The confusion over identity is not exclusive to the name he operates under, Rawlinson has previous in this department. Read on for more on the deceptive, lying world of the world’s most deluded dog trainer, a man so desperate for others to recognise him as a credible professional he creates identities for himself on web forums and talks about himself in glowing terms. The DogListener is, in reality, the DogLiar. Read on for more…The following was published by K9 Magazine in reference to DogListener Stan Rawlinson as it became apparent a major error had been made allowing Stan Rawlinson (DogListener) to associate his name with that of a respected, established dog magazine.

—–

Stan Rawlinson aka The Dog Listener – if you WERE thinking of using this man’s services be warned, there are things you need to know about his history of professional conduct. Please contact us if you require further information on why we have had to issue advice on this individual – something we have never had to do before or since with ANY dog related company, service or product.

Let us state right out the outset, Stan Rawlinson – the self titled ‘DogListener’ lies. He lies publicly and he lies often. If you are to appoint a dog trainer or any professional, you really do need to consider whether you want to entrust your services to an established liar. This man lies and decives and has developed a reputation for it. Reputable firms have followed our lead and he has found himself dropped from previous associations he once forged for himself. Like us, he probably invited himself in to an association in an attempt to boost his own public perception. But like us, other firms have also disassociated with him. We were wrong to allow him to associate with us and happy to now set the record straight.

UPDATE: Stan Rawlinson (Doglistener) Caught Out in Credentials Deception

We are very, very sorry we allowed ourselves to be duped in to publishing any items associated with Stan Rawlinson in connection with the K9 Magazine brand. It was a grave error of judgment on our part. Read on for further details.

Update: K9 Magazine wishes to point out that Stan Rawlinson who refers to himself as ‘Dog Listener’ is in no way connected to Jan Fennel who is known world wide as “The Dog Listener”. A statement to clarify on behalf of Jan Fennel’s organisation reads as follows:

“We would like it to be known that Mr Rawlinson is in NO way connected to our company or our world wide “Dog Listener” Organisation. “

K9 Magazine wishes to apologise to our readers for a lapse in judgement when appointing a self-proclaimed ‘expert’ to our K9 Magazine Animal Advisory Panel.

In 2005 we were approached by a man by the name of Stan Rawlinson.

Mr Rawlinson refers to himself as the ‘Dog Listener’ and explained to us that he wished to boost his media profile and would be keen to write articles for K9 Magazine and advise on our K9 Magazine Animal Advisory Panel.

UPDATE: Stan Rawlinson (Doglistener) Caught Out in Credentials Deception

We receive many, many unsolicited requests from people who would like to write for us and in 90% of cases we simply do not have the space available to offer an opportunity unless the contributor is of a suitably high caliber. We take a great deal of care when screening applications from prospective writers and even more so in the case of advisors.

Having received numerous complaints about the conduct of Mr Rawlinson on several dog related discussion forums, including one published by K9 Media Ltd (publisher of K9 Magazine) and having been alerted to a number of questionable practices deployed by him in an attempts to deceive and mislead dog owners about his identity, we accept that our decision to allow Stan Rawlinson to associate his name with K9 Magazine was a grave error of judgement on our behalf and we wish to take this opportunity to aplogise to our readers for this lapse of judgement and especially to the members of the K9 Magazine Animal Advisory Panel who may feel their position has been compromised by our decision to allow Mr Rawlinson to serve on our panel.

For any readers who have been prompted to seek dog training advice from Mr Rawlinson as a result of his association with K9 Magazine, we urge you to contact us as soon as possible.

Thank you.

IMPORTANT UPDATE: It has come to our attention since posting this message that a number of inappropriate comments regarding Mr Rawlinson have been submitted. These posts will not and cannot be published and our screening process will filter such postings. Please understand, this post is here simply to bring to the attention of our loyal readers that we made a lapse in judgement on this occasion in relation to this individual and convey publicly that we have taken measures to rectify our error. Any specific complaints about Mr Rawlinson’s conduct, which are not directly related to his previous association to K9 Magazine should be directed through appropriate channels of complaint and not aired here, thank you. Legal advice precludes us from discussing this issue in further detail at this time as a libel action is to be issued shortly. More information will be provided in due course. Thank you for your understanding and to everyone who has sent us emails. We appreciate your kindness.

UPDATE: Stan Rawlinson (Doglistener) Caught Out in Credentials Deception

But wait, there’s more. Stan Rawlinson’s lies don’t extend to misrepresenting himself by posing as other people on dog forums, no. He out and out attempts to deceive people on his OWN website about the true nature of his ‘credentials’. The actions of an established, highly unprofessional liar who is marketing himself to dog owners in an attempt to be put in a position of great trust. This is a concern and shows why greater regulation of dog trainers MUST happen soon. On his website Stan Rawlinson has published a diatribe about K9 Magazine, it contains a number of lies and blatant untruths. The DogListener claims on his site that legal proceedings are to be issued – he should really get round to issuing them as he’s had long enough to do so. K9 Magazine is NOT pursuing legal action at this time against Stan Rawlinson as, upon advice, it has been established that he would not be in a position to settle a libel bill. Hence the need to ensure the public is made fully aware that he has a track record of lying and deception and a very dubious grasp of how to attribute ‘credentials’ to himself. If Stan Rawlinson wishes to instigate legal proceedings against K9 Magazine, this would be very much welcomed but, as with most of his empty rhetoric, it looks like more fantasy on his behalf.

Stan Rawlinson – DogListener

Caught Out in Credentials Deception

Stan Rawlinson, the man who refers to himself as ‘Doglistener’ amongst several other (not always male) identities, has been caught up in yet another row about his self created ‘credentials’.

Rawlinson, well known to K9 Magazine readers for previous serious indiscretions, was, as recently as last week, claiming to be a ’spokesperson’ for a number of high profile organisations, including the BBC and Disney. A claim which is emphatically a lie. A claim which he has now had to retract.

This is not the first time Rawlinson has attempted to publicly mislead people about his identity and credentials. In December of 2006 Geoff Paulsen of The Walt Disney Company contacted us to demand the removal of any implied link between the “Disney” name and “specifically Stanley Rawlinson” after the self-titled ‘Doglistener’ claimed to have been a ‘behavioural spokesperson’ for the famous US organisation.

Rawlinson was made aware of Disney’s position but, it would appear, he’s been back up to his old tricks only this time he’s dragged the good names of the BBC, ITV and Sky News in to his fantasy world.  As the screen capture below shows, the ‘Doglistener’ was again misrepresenting the nature of his relationship with those organisations in order to boost his credentials on his website claiming himself to be a ’spokesman’ for the aforementioned corporations, in reality – he’s not, nor ever has been anything of the sort.

Click to enlarge

The BBC have – after legal consultation – written to Rawlinson, after initially ‘finding no record of him’ and he has now removed the misleading statement from his website.

However, there remains a larger problem and one that we will be tackling in the next edition of K9 Magazine; We must now ask: is time that we started to PROPERLY regulate the pet industry in order to protect pet owners from falling victim to unscrupulous, misleading pet service providers?

Whether it’s dog trainers misleading potential clients about their credentials or pet health care professionals who don’t declare their commercial interests, pet owners place a high degree of trust in the hands of those people who set themselves up to provide services on their behalf.

Is it time that people in these professions were brought up to a minimum charter standard? Should we have a ‘kitemark’ style system to help pet owners understand whether they are handing their money over to a genuine, professional, skilled practitioner or a money grabbing charlatan?

As more and more pet owners discover that dog trainers are, effectively, operating in cowboy country (create a business card, build a website, take out a Yellow pages ad, hey presto – you’re a ‘dog trainer’) and as health/therapy practitioners are steadily infiltrated by out and out crooks, surely it’s time that British pet owners were given peace of mind? They need and deserve to understand exactly who they are employing. They need and deserve to understand that not all is always as it seems when it comes to certain service providers. They deserve to be informed but more, they deserve to be protected.